Cited by 64Gender Roles and Identity StudiesPsychometric Methodologies and TestingGender and Feminist Studies

Assessing the Factor Structures of the 55- and 22-Item Versions of the Conformity to Masculine Norms Inventory

Owen, Jesse·2011·American Journal of Men's Health

Abstract

The current study examined the psychometric properties of the abbreviated versions, 55- and 22-items, of the Conformity to Masculine Norms Inventory (CMNI). The authors tested the factor structure for the 11 subscales of the CMNI-55 and the global masculinity factor for the CMNI-55 and the CMNI-22. In a clinical sample of men and women ( n = 522), the results supported the 11-factor model. Furthermore, the factor structure was invariant for men and women. The higher order model, which tested the utility of the global masculine score, demonstrated marginal fit. The factor structures for the global masculinity score for the CMNI-22 demonstrated poor fit. Collectively, the results suggest that the CMNI-55 is better represented in a multidimensional construct. The subscales’ alpha levels and factor loadings were, generally, within acceptable limits. Gender and ethnic mean level differences are also reported.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1557988310363817

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • There are suggestions that the factor scores of the CMNI are more meaningful than the total score.

    “There are suggestions, however, that the factor scores are more meaningful than the total score [23].”

    From Masculinity and suicidal thinking (2017) · cites this paper as [23]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Owen, J.
Affiliations
University of Louisville (US)
Corresponding author
Owen, Jesse
Venue
American Journal of Men's Health
Published
2010-05-18
Volume
5
Issue
2
Pages
118-128
ISSN
  • 1557-9883 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-9891
OpenAlex
W2104091335
Cited by
64
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 3
FWCI
6.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Journal of Men s Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender Roles and Identity Studies
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender and Feminist Studies
Keywords
masculinity, factor structure, abbreviated scale, psychometric properties, gender differences, ethnic differences, men's health
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Ethnicity, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Feasibility Studies, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Psychometrics, Sex Factors, Social Conformity, Social Perception, United States, Models, Statistical, Young Adult, Masculinity

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review